posted on Nov, 23 2009 @ 01:02 PM
(hi there, I'm a new member)
One of the things I have frequently seen on ATS is the assertion (either by ATS members or by so-called experts in articles linked to by members) of
'facts' pertaining to ancient civilizations.
The trouble is... many of these facts are useless. I would venture that around 90% of what we know about ancient Egypt is likely based on suppositions
made almost 100 years ago by early Egyptologists and accepted as fact, and has not been challenged since.
Picture a classroom in the year 4000 CE, assuming there are such antiquated notions as classrooms at that point. The teacher is introducing the
subject of the ancient Floridian civilization, describing the extensive temple complex of "Or-Lando", dedicated to the anthropomorphic mouse god
"Mikey". Analysis of residues in the paths around the complex suggest that the ancient Floridians would regularly make pilgrimages to the site,
leaving sacrificial offerings of sugar in an effort to avert Mikey's fearsome wrath.
The ancient Floridians were of course savages, and the proof is in the fact that they built a neighboring complex at "Eppkot" with a great Dome as a
shrine to a Dragon God, and were subsequently wiped out during a war between the Mouse and Dragon cults. Proof of the war can be seen in the literally
thousands of bodies found at and between the two sites.
Thinking about what would be left behind if some cataclysm were to strike the southeastern United States today, these conclusions are not at all
far-fetched, however ridiculous they seem to us at first glance.
The idea that we can 'know' most of this, even with our supposedly advanced methods, is arrogant and laughable.
Perhaps Mark Twain said it best: "It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble, it's what you know for sure that just ain't so."
With that, I discard preconceived notions and cast off the shackles of dogma, and venture into the unknown and unknowable. It's good to be here.